monkey fu and pig do

We had a discussion before class a few weeks past about MA in the military. The US has tried out a plethora of MA and what we use today is something of a joke from what I've heard. So my question is, if given control over what to teach our troops, which MAs would you choose?

I would go with a mix of Judo, Escrima, and some aspects of BJJ. Judo, I think, is one of the more obvious choices. Get the enemy on the ground and **** the **** out of em I mean kill them. Escrima for improvised weapons and knife fights. BJJ for gaining control of the fight if you were both on the ground.

I would take escrima/dog brothers 'die less often' programme for the core, since in army a bayonet or rifle, or rifle with bayonet should always be close by. Judo should be heavily adapted and forbidden throws (picking up legs, takedowns,...) heavily emphazised, since they are much easier to learn and to apply in apropriate situation. Otherwise it's another solid art, but has to be trained nonstop and in daily curriculum. If there'd be a quality combat sambo instructor available it would also be nice.
My thoughts on the subject.

We had a discussion before class a few weeks past about MA in the military. The US has tried out a plethora of MA and what we use today is something of a joke from what I've heard.

There is only one way to find out if MACP / MCMAP are really a joke. Join up, take the training and see for yourself; the added bonus of serving your country would be a good thing.

Seriously, some of the early hand-to-hand stuff presented to trainees was total bullshit. I remember soldiers telling me "they teach you just enough to get yourself hurt". During the development of the modern programs, they obviously got the right person in Matt Larsen. The modern system is a bit more well-rounded and accounts for more scenarios than the H2H taught before. MACP is far less of a joke than its predecessors.

One of my Jiu Jitsu instructors, Phil Cardella, is involved in MACP. From what I understand, MACP starts off developing basic ground fighting and grappling skills ala GJJ, then incorporates striking. The Army hosts competitions to foster these skills.

Phil Cardella coaching the current Army heavy weight champion in this year's championships at Ft. Hood:

A few pics from the competition:

An important quote from the MACP Web site:

There are a couple of basic tenants of Modern Combatives that are important to understand. The first one is that the winner of the hand-to-hand fight in combat is the one whose buddy shows up first with a gun.

There is only one way to find out if MACP / MCMAP are really a joke. Join up, take the training and see for yourself; the added bonus of serving your country would be a good thing.

Seriously, some of the early hand-to-hand stuff presented to trainees was total bullshit. I remember soldiers telling me "they teach you just enough to get yourself hurt". During the development of the modern programs, they obviously got the right person in Matt Larsen. The modern system is a bit more well-rounded and accounts for more scenarios than the H2H taught before. MACP is far less of a joke than its predecessors.

When I went through BCT our H2H was one or two days out of 2 months. VERY basic ground fighting. In AIT we practiced more often but learned nothing new. Our jitsu coach was telling us that one of the blue belts is in some branch of the Army and that he said when he practices with his brothers in arms he usually runs a clinic. Granted that's just hearsay, but I've also seen similar responses even here on Bullshido.

As far as striking goes, I don't feel that's a necessity. If you're in a situation where you need to use H2H something very bad has already happened and you don't need to waste any more time punching and kicking. Throw that son of a bitch to the ground and smash his head and neck. Just my opinion on the matter.

When I went through BCT our H2H was one or two days out of 2 months. VERY basic ground fighting. In AIT we practiced more often but learned nothing new.

The unit-level training has, for a fact, improved. I have no idea about BCT or AIT these days. My experience with MACP is limited; due to other training commitments, I only did the two-week at Ft. Benning. The soldiers who went through Level IV could probably provide better insight.

What I do know: When I went through BCT (1996) we had about two days of H2H; during AIT we had 0 days of H2H. The two days in basic were exercises in futility, and were just about enough to get your ass kicked. MACP isn't THE answer, but it is as good of a system that they could develop within the given parameters, and train thousands of soldiers to a standard.

Here you go from an actual ACTIVE instructor. I think it all depends on who you talked to, when they left and who they have contact with now. I'll look for the posts, but the changes are roughly 10 years old. I'll look for the post with the history according to Gezere later.
Found it:

Originally Posted by Gezere

WHOA! Missed this. Who did you train with!?!? I just left Fort Bragg, NC and I pretty much every BJJ BB who is in Special Forces or Special Operations. If I don't know him then I know the others I know would, ITS THAT SMALL OF A COMMUNITY! So who was it. Tim Kennedy, Alan Sherabo, Andrew Chapplle, Curly? WHO!?! Don't give me that you can't or won't post his name BS because if you don't you are just proving yourself a LIAR! And don't think you will just throw out a name and won't get it checked because everyone I just name I know personally! I have trained and/or competed against them. (Hint there is even video on this site of it!) As for the Gracies training the Rangers. Yeah SFC (ret) Matt Larsen and a few others wen to Cali to train with the Gracies then come back and develop MACP. I know this well because I am one of the earlier certified Instructors. (Which is also easily verified by Larsen or contacting the Combatives school at Ft Benning) So fess up or STFU.

Originally Posted by Gezere

Mark you would be wrong. There have been currently over 800 incidents (granted that is relatively small compared to the number of fire fighs) in both Iraq and Afghanistan in which MAC has been used. I am MACP Instructor and we do training in full battle rattle. The problem is that due to so many other things on the training calender it takes a while to get guys to that level to do it in a more regular basis.

Originally Posted by Gezere

You are wrong now.

No. You stated:

You rejected a premise when the FACT is that an Army, ours, has used the material trained, which again I been instructing for years, in TWO conflicts right now.

That really has little bearing on this issue.

Well you can disagree but you would still be wrong. Mark I'm not a guys sitting on the sidelines this is something I know first hand and as veteran of our current conflict and will be returning to it in a few weeks.

Bottomline is MACP (which is not just BJJ BTW) works, it has worked on our current battlefield. Guard passes and sweeps as well as armlocks and chokes have been performed by men in full gear in the middle of a firefight. It has proven itself enough to warrant the time spent training it and that isn't enough. Yes its there to instill an "Warrior Spirit" which is needed but it also made of of methods that pple have used successfully. Yes we shoot pple but this conflict isn't like what we had been training for before. This isn't force on force. We are not fighting a clearly identifiable enemy. We do find ourselves working in close proximity with pple who may or may not be bad guys. We enter confined areas where you might find you can't employ your weapon as fast as you hoped and your battles might not be able to help you right away so you have to do something there and then. MACP is not for when everything goes right it for when **** goes wrong.

Originally Posted by Gezere

Just saw this and this that is a erroneous report I don't know where to begin. Also several of the people I have certified have been involved in H2H combat in both Iraq and Afghanistan.

Originally Posted by Gezere

Thats only 1/4 of the program. Its much more than BJJ in ACUs, but BJJ is the base. Its a way to ease pple into it.

It not as low as it used to be. More and more we have soldiers getting engaged in CQC (I don't want to use H2H because it give pple the idea that both parties are unarmed which is never the case) Main reasons are because a) lethal force isn't to first thing we are told to go for right away b) close proximity of the area of operations. Sometimes you are in a large area where you can manuever, sometimes you up close and personal.

Originally Posted by Gezere

I don't care how good you are with a knife. If I got your back you're dead.
We do Shockknife fights often and I've used Judo and JJ to great effect doing it.
In a real knife fight it saved my ass so I definitely can't discount it.
With that said yes I agree only use grappling if you have no other options but grappling with definitely help you out.

I have literally put my life on it and I'm still here. Granted it wasn't Plan A.

Of course gun beats knife with distance but as we all know fights don't always go the way we planned. I my case I was unarmed, save for a cloth back that I used as best I could, against two jackasses one armed with a knife.
I think the best thing these drills do is show people how vulnerable they are. The hollywood disarms and ninja tricks go out the window. Then there was the lotion incident.......

Originally Posted by Gezere

No one thing in particular just experience from controlling people from their back and limiting what they can do like isolating the weapon arm while maintaining control and attacking, disarming, etc.

This was the initial weapons training. Keep in mind that vast majority people we deal with have never been in any sort of fight what so ever. So generally the initial part of any new training in MACP is to build a mindset. So by this point we usually just got people comfortable with grappling or just engaging another person unarmed. We start with introducing things and building upon it. Knife vs unarmed no strikes, knife vs unarmed strikes allowed, knife vs knife, knife vs M4 (you went black), etc.

The Shockknife isn't perfect but it does what training blades don't, instill a healthy fear. Training knives didn't really make people react. We used a stun gun to simulate a knife. It made people react. The shockknife is the best mix of the two right now.
Also the whole "You don't know when you're cut" thing isn't always true. Adrenaline masks some pain but not all of it. Sometimes you might feel the knife sometimes you know exactly when you got cut/stabbed.

Its confidence born from experience. I do a lot of training with people who know what they are doing with a knife. I also know what I'm doing with a knife and I also know what I'm doing when I take someones back. Keep in mind taking someones back doesn't just mean I'm on my back. I can have your back with you belly down or you on your side. Either way its about controlling the body.